Injury Josh Cowan - achilles injury

[JUBJUB]

 

[Partridge]

They've both got as much chances of playing seniors for Geelong.

 

[thejester]

Body not up to it. Paul Lynch all over again, probably worse really (at least with Lynch we saw how good he was).

I don't think that's entirely fair. He missed all of 2012 not because of the severity of his achilles injury but because the club didn't diagnose it properly. Once he was sent to the specialist in London at the start of last year who did identify what it was he went from surgery to returning to training in six weeks, which (obligatory I'm no doctor disclaimer) you'd think is pretty impressive given the usual severity of achilles injuries. Now it's the other achilles, but as Snelling said in the video now that they know what it is they're pretty confident he'll bit fully fit again in another couple of months.

Take out the achilles debacle and you're left with a couple of hamstring strains. He did play six VFL games last year so it's not like he's the same as Menzel and breaks down every time he sees a Sherrin. Think you're right that the list does need constant churn, but it's hard to believe he wouldn't be a better candidate as a rookie than most who would be available.

 

[catempire]

What were the exact words?

Snelling's said something like:

"Given its about a 12 week injury that just about rules him out for 2014. But we would hope that he'll be pretty right to go for the first day of preseason."

I don't think you can read anything into that at all about the security of his spot on the list.

 

[vinum coupe]

Snelling's said something like:

"Given its about a 12 week injury that just about rules him out for 2014. But we would hope that he'll be pretty right to go for the first day of GFL preseason."

EFA

 

[Teriyakicat]

I don't think that's entirely fair. He missed all of 2012 not because of the severity of his achilles injury but because the club didn't diagnose it properly. Once he was sent to the specialist in London at the start of last year who did identify what it was he went from surgery to returning to training in six weeks, which (obligatory I'm no doctor disclaimer) you'd think is pretty impressive given the usual severity of achilles injuries. Now it's the other achilles, but as Snelling said in the video now that they know what it is they're pretty confident he'll bit fully fit again in another couple of months.

Take out the achilles debacle and you're left with a couple of hamstring strains. He did play six VFL games last year so it's not like he's the same as Menzel and breaks down every time he sees a Sherrin. Think you're right that the list does need constant churn, but it's hard to believe he wouldn't be a better candidate as a rookie than most who would be available.

I think this sums up the typical bad luck that the LTI players have had, Jester. Vardy- with his hip, then his ACL, Cowan with the Achilles, soft tissues injuries, then now the other Achilles (makes you wonder why the experts didn't look at that while they were doing the other one, doesn't it? especially if it was a structural issue). By a short stretch, even Menzel, with one knee, the other knee, then the failed "fix", could fall under that umbrella of 'no injury is exactly the same'....

 

[Partridge]

I don't think that's entirely fair. He missed all of 2012 not because of the severity of his achilles injury but because the club didn't diagnose it properly. Once he was sent to the specialist in London at the start of last year who did identify what it was he went from surgery to returning to training in six weeks, which (obligatory I'm no doctor disclaimer) you'd think is pretty impressive given the usual severity of achilles injuries. Now it's the other achilles, but as Snelling said in the video now that they know what it is they're pretty confident he'll bit fully fit again in another couple of months.

Take out the achilles debacle and you're left with a couple of hamstring strains. He did play six VFL games last year so it's not like he's the same as Menzel and breaks down every time he sees a Sherrin. Think you're right that the list does need constant churn, but it's hard to believe he wouldn't be a better candidate as a rookie than most who would be available.

Whichever way they spin it, the result is this - a player with severe Achilles problems in both ankles, and the net result that he's played 3 senior games in 5 full seasons. It's hard to construe it from a drafting perspective as anything less than a disaster.

 

[GFrost]

From the AFL site:

AFL.com.au understands that Cowan has been told that he will remain with the Cats next season.
But no decision has been made about whether the speedy onballer stays on the senior list or is redrafted as a rookie.

 

[Turbocat]

From the AFL site:

AFL.com.au understands that Cowan has been told that he will remain with the Cats next season.
But no decision has been made about whether the speedy onballer stays on the senior list or is redrafted as a rookie.

I know Geelong want to do the right thing by the player but is that really the right choice? He may once have been going to be a good player but 3 games in 5 years....?????? Who knows what he will be like now , and if he should be considered a still what he was/

 

[thejester]

Whichever way they spin it, the result is this - a player with severe Achilles problems in both ankles, and the net result that he's played 3 senior games in 5 full seasons. It's hard to construe it from a drafting perspective as anything less than a disaster.

I'm not sure how I can explain any more clearly that that's a massively disingenuous way of putting it, but sure, whatever. Mitch Brown, 10 games in 5 'full' seasons because of injuries. Drafting disaster, should have been delisted at the end of last year.

 

[AM]

Not sure the club can afford to be so generous, especially not after already extending the contract on Menzel (and to a lesser extent Vardy).

*cough*

 

[AM]

What were the exact words? Given the structure of our reserves in the VFL etc., it's reasonable to think that someone in Snelling's position isn't going to come out and say that Cowan had to prove himself in the AFL this year, he hasn't been able to do it, so we wish him well for the future. It's Snelling's job to keep him as upbeat as possible, but I'd have a serious issue with the club guaranteeing anything with regards to a list position (even on the rookie list) at the end of the year to Cowan, at this stage. Because if he is there in 2015, good luck to him, but it means that another player isn't. And that other player is likely to:

1. be significantly younger
2. provide depth in a specific area of need (maybe multiple areas)
3. have shown more than Cowan at senior level
4. some combination of 1,2 and 3.

I think most Geelong supporters wouldn't be hoping for Cowan to be delisted. But when it comes down to Cowan, or Schroder/Brown/Bews/Hamling/Hunt, or perhaps even another 8-10 game 'offer' to one of the older players (Kelly?), well, I'm sorry to Cowan, but he's last on that list for me. And if he stays on the list, gets himself right and becomes a 100 game player for Geelong, there will be no-one happier for him than me.

Incidentally, where is our 2009 draft/trade period starting to rank in terms of the all-time '****ed by injuries' years? Seriously, trading for Drum and drafting Vardy, Menzel and Cowan? If I was Neil Balme, I'd be assigning an around-the-clock bodyguard to Mitch Duncan.

They were:

"All things going well, he should be up and running for the beginning of pre-season," Snelling said.

"Hopefully we then see him for a full year next year."

Really pleased the club has recognised his ability by assuring his future. At no stage did I think there would be any other outcome really. The kid can play and clearly the medicos are confident his issues are fixable.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I know Geelong want to do the right thing by the player but is that really the right choice? He may once have been going to be a good player but 3 games in 5 years....?????? Who knows what he will be like now , and if he should be considered a still what he was/

Exactly. Menzel was on a different planet to Cowan, in terms of potential and has played AFL more recently (as crazy as that seems). Supporters can afford to be sentimental, if they wish, but the club really can't. I have no idea why anything needs to be promised to him at this stage, beyond the best treatment possible to get his body right and any other support that he (or any other AFL player) might need.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

They were:


Really pleased the club has recognised his ability by assuring his future. At no stage did I think there would be any other outcome really. The kid can play and clearly the medicos are confident his issues are fixable.

The article is made up (like most afl.com.au 'it is understood' pieces, including the one on Lycett today). For one thing, the club would not be making that call until he has had the surgery and they see how the recovery from that is and he has an updated progress from the medicos. That's not to say it's not possible he won't be here next year, but the decision won't have been made yet and the article is entirely made up.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

For me I am with Turbo, the main issue I have with retaining Cowan is that list spots are precious, we have other injury prone players we are carrying and the needs the list management structure would suggest we need a ruck on the rookie list much more than we need Cowan.
That said, if they rate him that much that they want to re-draft him as a rookie and delist one of the three existing rookies to make a spot for him then fine, but to give him the only free spot and not add another ruckman I think would be a bad error.

I like the guy for what it's worth and I wish him well.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

They were:


Really pleased the club has recognised his ability by assuring his future. At no stage did I think there would be any other outcome really. The kid can play and clearly the medicos are confident his issues are fixable.

That's fine. To be honest, I don't Snelling's words guarantee him a spot at all (note the ambiguous use of the word 'Hopefully') and I'm not sure what else Snelling could say, without appearing like an utter **** ('Yep, we'll continue to work with him and, provided we don't cut him loose, he might be right for the start of preseason'). Nor should Snelling be in a position to guarantee anyone anything, besides his best treatment and expertise when they need it to recover from an injury. It's not his business to be speculating about who will and won't be around in 2015 and beyond and I imagine he'd prefer to stay removed from that anyway.

Anyway, I'll remember those words if it turns out as has been reported and we are forced to delist or trade some other poor sod who has actually contributed on the park in the past few years because we're out of list spots.

I mean, this is exactly the same position we were in with Cowan last year and the year before that.

 

[thejester]

Exactly. Menzel was on a different planet to Cowan, in terms of potential and has played AFL more recently (as crazy as that seems). Supporters can afford to be sentimental, if they wish, but the club really can't. I have no idea why anything needs to be promised to him at this stage, beyond the best treatment possible to get his body right and any other support that he (or any other AFL player) might need.

By what, eight weeks? Cowan did play six games in the VFL last year.

 

[AM]

The article is made up (like most afl.com.au 'it is understood' pieces, including the one on Lycett today). For one thing, the club would not be making that call until he has had the surgery and they see how the recovery from that is and he has an updated progress from the medicos. That's not to say it's not possible he won't be here next year, but the decision won't have been made yet and the article is entirely made up.

CS said to Menz when he did his knee in the twos the club would stick with him - in the rooms immediately after the game way before the surgery. The same assurances were given to Woolnough during his injury travails from my recollection. And it was Woolnough who ultimately made the call. I think Drum was in a similar situation. I'd be surprised if there weren't many others throughout our history as our record of sticking by players doing it rough with injury is solid.

Big call to say it is made-up when you really have no idea as to the validity of that comment. All we can say is that from Snelling's comment the medicos are confident his issue is fixable as was a similar issue in his other leg.Time will tell.

 

[AM]

That's fine. To be honest, I don't Snelling's words guarantee him a spot at all (note the ambiguous use of the word 'Hopefully') and I'm not sure what else Snelling could say, without appearing like an utter **** ('Yep, we'll continue to work with him and, provided we don't cut him loose, he might be right for the start of preseason'). Nor should Snelling be in a position to guarantee anyone anything, besides his best treatment and expertise when they need it to recover from an injury. It's not his business to be speculating about who will and won't be around in 2015 and beyond and I imagine he'd prefer to stay removed from that anyway.

Anyway, I'll remember those words if it turns out as has been reported and we are forced to delist or trade some other poor sod who has actually contributed on the park in the past few years because we're out of list spots.

I mean, this is exactly the same position we were in with Cowan last year and the year before that.

Where did I say Snelling's words guaranteed him a spot? My recollection is I actually qualified my comment by indicating it was ultimately a list management decision.

Of course he would include "hopefully" because it's not his call. Nonetheless I still regard his comment as positive Not only for the outcome of the surgery but his playing future too.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, the clubs record is to stick by players doing it tough with injury. I'm confident the club will continue to do so with Josh who is a talent. I don't buy the AFL story is pure sophistry either. Time will tell

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

By what, eight weeks? Cowan did play six games in the VFL last year.

It's merely a point that as far ago as it seems it's been since we've seen Menzel in an AFL game, it's been even longer since we've seen Cowan out there. And it wasn't as though Cowan was exactly pushing for a Rising Star nomination when he was playing in the seniors. As for him getting on the park for 16 (by my count) VFL games in 2012/13, I'd argue that that could be seen as a good and a bad thing. Let's just say I couldn't see Menzel playing 16 VFL games over a two year period since his last AFL appearance, without making the step back up to AFL level.

 

[thejester]

It's merely a point that as far ago as it seems it's been since we've seen Menzel in an AFL game, it's been even longer since we've seen Cowan out there. And it wasn't as though Cowan was exactly pushing for a Rising Star nomination when he was playing in the seniors. As for him getting on the park for 16 (by my count) VFL games in 2012/13, I'd argue that that could be seen as a good and a bad thing. Let's just say I couldn't see Menzel playing 16 VFL games over a two year period since his last AFL appearance, without making the step back up to AFL level.

He only played one game in 2012 because of his achilles. Worth noting that the coaches have said they were keen to get him back into the side just before he did his hammy last year, but that probably just makes him a member of Scotty's 50-man best 22.

I understand the case against retaining him, but charting his early progress I think makes a case for his renewal. If someone like Hunt or Schroder gets moved specifically to keep Cowan, I'd think that was the wrong call. But you'd think given the chances of some retirement/players trying their luck elsewhere, delisting Cowan would be opening up the 4-5th spot on the list. At which point you're probably drafting in the 40-50 range, which is about where Cowan was taken in 2009. So you're probably drafting the same type of player (state squad fringes) with the expectation that he'll sit in the VFL and develop for a couple of years. Cowan was definitely on track in that regard before the achilles - finished 6th in the VFL B&F in his second season (only AFL listed players ahead of him were Guthrie and Simpkin) and did enough to debut. Yeah he didn't star but I don't think he looked totally out of place either.

tl;dr, if we are struggling to open up the minimum list spots and the choice is between Schroder and Cowan, you'd pick the former. Equally if his achilles doesn't pull up post-surgery then you wish him the best and send him on his way. But I don't really see the point of throwing away five years of investment on a player just when that investment could pay off.

 

[Pivo]

...but that probably just makes him a member of Scotty's 50-man best 22.

I laughed.

Hard.

Brilliantly droll work Jester.

 

[thejester]

I laughed.

Hard.

Brilliantly droll work Jester.

Pretty sure I stole it from Partridge. Or (even more ironically?) MC Extra Dollop.

 

[Pivo]

Pretty sure I stole it from Partridge. Or (even more ironically?) MC Extra Dollop.

Well, in that case, brilliantly droll, plagiarised work.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

He only played one game in 2012 because of his achilles. Worth noting that the coaches have said they were keen to get him back into the side just before he did his hammy last year, but that probably just makes him a member of Scotty's 50-man best 22.

Fair enough. The AFL Record Season Guide from the respective years had him playing five of the first six rounds in the VFL in 2012, then pretty much the second half of the year in 2013. I've got no idea where they get that information from.

I understand the case against retaining him, but charting his early progress I think makes a case for his renewal. If someone like Hunt or Schroder gets moved specifically to keep Cowan, I'd think that was the wrong call. But you'd think given the chances of some retirement/players trying their luck elsewhere, delisting Cowan would be opening up the 4-5th spot on the list. At which point you're probably drafting in the 40-50 range, which is about where Cowan was taken in 2009. So you're probably drafting the same type of player (state squad fringes) with the expectation that he'll sit in the VFL and develop for a couple of years. Cowan was definitely on track in that regard before the achilles - finished 6th in the VFL B&F in his second season (only AFL listed players ahead of him were Guthrie and Simpkin) and did enough to debut. Yeah he didn't star but I don't think he looked totally out of place either.

That's fair enough too. But if we're basing it primarily on his VFL performances, well players like Hogan and Djerrkura have torn the VFL up as well. Sheringham and Stringer are others who regularly look a cut above at that level and would be two others whose spots could be in jeopardy, depending on what they do with Cowan.

tl;dr, if we are struggling to open up the minimum list spots and the choice is between Schroder and Cowan, you'd pick the former. Equally if his achilles doesn't pull up post-surgery then you wish him the best and send him on his way. But I don't really see the point of throwing away five years of investment on a player just when that investment could pay off.

I agree. I just think it's crazy for anyone (well anyone that matters) to guarantee that Cowan will or won't be on the list next year. We've got no idea if the other fringe players who are out of contract will prove themselves to be valuable player over the remainder of the season, or become certainties to be delisted. We have no idea if players that we'd pencilled in for the 2015 squad will be traded. We have no idea if three, two, one, or zero players will want to retire. That's all important, as is the next 3-4 months for Cowan.